Face Off: Cap & Trade: The Cure for Climate Change Pessimists

Almost as long as scientists have been warning about the dangers of climate change, there have been people explaining why we shouldn't try to solve it. To track this attitude, you need only follow the retreating lines in the sand.

Story Continued Below

First, the Earth wasn't warming at all. When the scientific evidence became overwhelming, skeptics admitted it was getting hotter but denied that human activity was the cause.

When the facts showed otherwise, they backed up again. A leading climate change skeptic reacted to the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report by saying, "It's hardly news that human beings have had a hand in the planetary warming that began more than 30 years ago."

Lately we've begun to hear a new excuse for inaction. Pessimistic voices are declaring that climate change can't be solved. In some cases, these critics have gone straight from "it's not happening" to "we can't stop it." In other cases, normally thoughtful commentators have thrown up their hands.

Their claim is that we can't cut carbon pollution enough to stabilize the climate and head off the worst effects of global warming. Most scientists estimate that we need to reduce emissions by 60 to 80 percent by mid-century to achieve stability, and the proponents of inaction have decided that's impossible. The technology, they say, isn't there to get the job done.

But the truth is that the United States can grow and prosper while achieving the necessary reductions in carbon pollution. Not only are these critics wrong about current technologies -- scientists Steve Pacala and Robert Socolow of Princeton have demonstrated that there are 15 existing technologies available to make the necessary reductions -- but they are also wrong about America's ability to innovate and triumph.

If we unleash the cash and creativity in the private sector with a cap-and-trade system, we will experience a low-carbon technology revolution.

Again and again, American entrepreneurs and investors have shown the ability to solve problems when there is a market incentive for them to act. If the government will lead by capping carbon pollution -- the primary cause of climate change -- the market will respond with investment and innovation on a scale to solve this problem. Already, venture capitalists are pouring more than $300 million a month into new energy technologies. But it will take the certainty of a cap, which puts an overall limit on carbon pollution, to unleash a sustained wave of investment and innovation.

Take one example of many: Burning coal to produce electricity is responsible for about 40 percent of the CO2 emissions from the United States. And nearly one-third of the energy in coal that leads to those emissions is lost as waste heat in a typical coal-fired power plant. If carbon reductions carried a monetary value, as they would under a cap, the work being done to increase this efficiency would expand rapidly. The technology could then be sold overseas, not only helping our balance of trade but also reducing greenhouse gas emissions in places like China.

The pessimists also ask a reasonable question about China's expanding economy, powered largely by coal. Everyone agrees that China and other major developing nations must reduce their emissions if we are to tackle this problem. But the pessimists ignore that fact that China has already instituted tougher fuel economy standards for cars than our own, and further action on their part would be helped, not hindered, by U.S. leadership. In fact, few global problems are solved without U.S. leadership and action, and climate change is no different. As long as we fail to act, we divert international pressure from China to ourselves and give Beijing a ready-made excuse for inaction.

The incredible momentum for action on climate change is, in itself, a testament to the fact that we can solve this problem. The 10 CEOs from firms such as GE, Caterpillar and Duke Energy who recently endorsed a mandatory cap on carbon are hard-headed realists. They spoke out for a better world, but they also spoke up for their stockholders. It is the considered judgment of these corporate leaders that the carbon cap they endorsed is both technologically achievable and economically sound.

The gloomy climate change pessimists ignore both our capabilities and our history of innovation. Optimism has always served our nation, and in this case, optimism is firmly rooted in the reality of the market.